Has the 'green' argument for buses been lost?

[johncrossley]

Has the 'green' argument for buses been lost? Do people think driving an electric car is green enough (it isn't, by the way) and so there is no longer an argument for using buses for environmental reasons?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Has the 'green' argument for buses been lost? Do people think driving an electric car is green enough (it isn't, by the way) and so there is no longer an argument for using buses for environmental reasons?

Not really, as buses are also rapidly electrifying. It's rail that faces a bit challenge - that fume belching 1980s branch line DMU doesn't stand up well against a new electric bus.

 

[Snow1964]

The message for cars is currently lost due to recent price moves

Electricity costs going up
petrol costs easing (down to 155-165p generally)
diesel (which is similar heating oil) nearer 180-190p

There are huge chunks of UK where there are no electric bus services, so any going green argument is not applicable and not considered. Both our two local bus companies use 10-15 year old diesel buses, and don’t have any electric buses on their fleet (and as far as I’m aware none on order), even though both companies serve the low emission zone in Bath.

 

[Dai Corner]

Has the 'green' argument for buses been lost? Do people think driving an electric car is green enough (it isn't, by the way) and so there is no longer an argument for using buses for environmental reasons?

Have a significant number of passengers ever used buses because they're 'greener'? They're usually there because they're travelling free with a concessionary pass or have no alternative.

I was a member of a focus group of bus passengers and one of the questions we were asked was about rechargeable buses. Our reaction was one of indifference.

 

[AM9]

Not really, as buses are also rapidly electrifying. It's rail that faces a bit challenge - that fume belching 1980s branch line DMU doesn't stand up well against a new electric bus.

Nor will that brand new Spanish CO2 generator thrashing up and down lines in the North/WalesWest Midlands for the next 30 years!

 

[johncrossley]

Not really, as buses are also rapidly electrifying.

However, the progress outside London is slow. TfL is buying almost all electric buses, but outside London new diesel buses still seem to outnumber new electric ones. Are there any stats on the number of 22-reg buses that were electric and diesel outside London?

But that may not even matter, as my hypothesis is that people might think that having an electric car is 'green' enough already, and so they don't need to use a bus for environmental reasons, even an electric one.

 

[Dr Day]

Tyre 'dust' is potentially just as harmful as exhaust fumes.

 

[HullRailMan]

Is it even a consideration for the vast majority of people? I’d hedge a bet that bus use generally is because it’s free (pass holders) or there’s no other option. I’d honestly be amazed if someone actively chose to inflict out local ‘service’ on themselves. I’m also not convinced that most people care about green issues, or care enough to give up the convenience of a car.

 

[johncrossley]

Have a significant number of passengers ever used buses because they're 'greener'? They're usually there because they're travelling free with a concessionary pass or have no alternative.

Obviously the typical British bus service is very unappealing at the moment, so you would have to be very determined to use buses at the present time. The argument for improving them, so that people will actively use them, has historically hinged on their enviromental benefits. But if that's gone, then there's basically no point in buses apart from being a social service for people without cars.

 

[stuu]

I would say the argument for improving buses has generally been about reducing congestion, rather than purely environmental

 

[GusB]

I don't think the argument against 'green' buses has been lost at all. Could we be further ahead with introducing zero emission vehicles? Yes, absolutely, but there is a significant cost involved and there is only so much funding to go around. In an ideal world we'd all be travelling on electric buses, but priority has to go towns and cities that have clean air zones.

We have to be realistic about how quickly things can be changed, especially when you consider the events of the last couple of years.

Tyre 'dust' is potentially just as harmful as exhaust fumes.

This is not a valid argument against greener vehicle technologies. The best way to reduce tyre dust is to cut the total number of vehicles on the road. Encouraging people to get out of their cars and use public transport will go a long way to address this issue.

 

[edwin_m]

Electric propulsion may help the economics of buses more than that of cars, because a bus is more intensively used so the lower running cost is more significant in relation to the higher capital cost. However, this may not apply if the bus needs to be taken out of service for charging, so that the operator needs more electric vehicles than it would for diesels.

 

[johncrossley]

I don't think the argument against 'green' buses has been lost at all. Could we be further ahead with roducing zero emission vehicles? Yes, absolutely, but there is a significant cost involved and there is only so much funding to go around. In an ideal world* we'd all be travelling on electric buses, but priority has to go towns and cities that have clean air zone

We have to be realistic about how quickly things can be changed, especially when you consider the events of the last couple of years.

London has been buying almost exclusively electric buses for some years now yet the other major cities have hardly got any.

However, my point was not about buses being 'green'. For decades we have been arguing for public transport investment to solve the problems of congestion, pollution and climate change, long before electric vehicles became viable. Other countries noted that and invested accordingly. Now that electric cars are here, the pollution and climate argument is less strong in the eyes of the general public, even though we (that is, people on this forum who are savvy about transport) know different.

 

[fgwrich]

Contrary to some of the comments made here, I don't fully think the green argument has been lost through the quality or type of vehicle used but, maybe, due to the current shortage of drivers & higher increased costs affecting the industry at the moment - if it means people are having to switch back to their car because the last bus service of the evening has been cut back drastically, or because their regular service doesn't turn up due to unreliability or vehicle break downs (like my local), then the green argument of catching the bus is getting lost - particularly ironic given the branding across our local stagecoach south fleet now.

 

[Tetchytyke]

People buy electric cars because they think it's a greener version of what they already have. In that regard they're right, although exhaust fumes are not the only pollution from a car.

I don’t think anyone considers an electric car to be the green alternative to the bus.

I also don't think that environmental concerns by themselves will ever tempt people out of a private car on to the bus. For that to happen the bus needs to be more convenient than the car. In the current climate, the bus is as far away from this as it's ever been.

 

[GusB]

London has been buying almost exclusively electric buses for some years now yet the other major cities have hardly got any.

I don't have an exhaustive list of areas that have electric vehicles, but two places that spring to mind are the nearest cities to where I live: Aberdeen and Inverness. Aberdeen has been trialling hydrogen vehicles for a few years now, while Inverness had a pilot scheme using electric Solos. We have to remember that the technology wasn't proven at the time, and now it's still very much in a development phase. Any operator that was an early adopter was going to be taking a significant risk. Fortunately we're in the position where there are a few companies offering "repower" solutions for vehicles that may not have reached the end of their useful lives, but the battery tech has moved on.

Some bus companies have adopted a "wait and see" attitude, relying on Euro 6 until such time that electric propulsion is sufficiently mature. Let's not forget that switching to electric propulsion requires significant depot upgrades; that may be more viable in London, but for operators in rural areas who often depend on income from tendered work, it's a hell of a gamble if there's the possibility that they won't retain those contracts in the next round of re-tendering.

However, my point was not about buses being 'green'. For decades we have been arguing for public transport investment to solve the problems of congestion, pollution and climate change, long before electric vehicles became viable. Other countries noted that and invested accordingly. Now that electric cars are here, the pollution and climate argument is less strong in the eyes of the general public, even though we (that is, people on this forum who are savvy about transport) know different.

Electric cars do nothing to address one of the biggest issues facing public transport - congestion. This isn't something that can be solved by bus companies alone; it needs a complete root-and-branch review of how we get about. This needs a proper transport strategy, and it is not going to be achieved as long as government at all levels refuses to see it as a priority.

 

[johncrossley]

I don't have an exhaustive list of areas that have electric vehicles, but two places that spring to mind are the nearest cities to where I live: Aberdeen and Inverness. Aberdeen has been trialling hydrogen vehicles for a few years now, while Inverness had a pilot scheme using electric Solos. We have to remember that the technology wasn't proven at the time, and now it's still very much in a development phase. Any operator that was an early adopter was going to be taking a significant risk. Fortunately we're in the position where there are a few companies offering "repower" solutions for vehicles that may not have reached the end of their useful lives, but the battery tech has moved on.

Some bus companies have adopted a "wait and see" attitude, relying on Euro 6 until such time that electric propulsion is sufficiently mature. Let's not forget that switching to electric propulsion requires significant depot upgrades; that may be more viable in London, but for operators in rural areas who often depend on income from tendered work, it's a hell of a gamble if there's the possibility that they won't retain those contracts in the next round of re-tendering.

I wouldn't expect Aberdeen and Inverness to be at the forefront of electric buses as they are still relatively small places. But Manchester and Birmingham are 2+ million conurbations so are surely big enough to justify electric buses.

 

[PTR 444]

Electric propulsion may help the economics of buses more than that of cars, because a bus is more intensively used so the lower running cost is more significant in relation to the higher capital cost. However, this may not apply if the bus needs to be taken out of service for charging, so that the operator needs more electric vehicles than it would for diesels.

You wouldn’t need to take bus vehicles out of service if they could charge on the go. I’m thinking of a solution where buses can charge on trolley wires installed along the most intensively used roads, using the stored electricity to run on battery power for the parts of the journey away from wires.

 

[Trainbike46]

London has been buying almost exclusively electric buses for some years now yet the other major cities have hardly got any.

This isn't entirely true; Belfast has 1/3rd of its metro services electric at present. First ordered 200 electric buses (none destined for london) and Derry in Norhern Ireland is getting a fully electric city bus fleet next year.

However, my point was not about buses being 'green'. For decades we have been arguing for public transport investment to solve the problems of congestion, pollution and climate change, long before electric vehicles became viable. Other countries noted that and invested accordingly. Now that electric cars are here, the pollution and climate argument is less strong in the eyes of the general public, even though we (that is, people on this forum who are savvy about transport) know different.

A good question might be, what percentage of the nation's bus fleet is electric, compared to what percentage of the nation's car fleet? I'm pretty sure electric (& hydrogen) has a higher share among buses compared to cars.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Oct 2022 ==

You wouldn’t need to take bus vehicles out of service if they could charge on the go. I’m thinking of a solution where buses can charge on trolley wires installed along the most intensively used roads, using the stored electricity to run on battery power for the parts of the journey away from wires.

Opportunity charging, where buses charge up at the end of the line while waiting to go back in service, is a common solution, and easier than trolley wires over the road.

However, the newest generation of electric buses typically won't have to recharge during a typical service day on a city route.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Oct 2022 ==

To answer the thread's original question, no the 'green' argument for public transport, including buses, still very much stands.

 

[GusB]

I wouldn't expect Aberdeen and Inverness to be at the forefront of electric buses as they are still relatively small places. But Manchester and Birmingham are 2+ million conurbations so are surely big enough to justify electric buses.

You forget that the operating environment in London is vastly different from that of "the provinces".

 

[johncrossley]

You forget that the operating environment in London is vastly different from that of "the provinces".

But that shouldn't be a barrier to something so fundamental. There are strong proponents of the operating environment outside London on this forum, so I would be surprised if they would accept that as a good enough reason.

 

[GusB]

But that shouldnt' be a barrier to something so fundamental. There are strong proponents of the operating environment outside London on this forum, so I would be surprised if they would accept that as a good enough reason.

I agree! It shouldn't be a barrier, but London is a regulated environment where a single body sets the terms and operators have to adhere to them. It's not the case elsewhere in the country.

 

[duncombec]

It has been stated multiple times by multiple operators that two things are stopping more widespread electrification of bus services in the UK: the price premium on new vehicles, which essentially sees you getting one bus for the price of two, and the difficulties in arranging infrastructure with the power companies. This is often measured in months rather than weeks, and the electrical companies are unwilling to provide the necessary infrastructure upgrades to their grid until everything is set with the vehicles, which then have a smaller lead-time than the infrastructure, because they don't see it as useful to upgrade capacity that then might not get used if funding does not come through for vehicles and the project is cancelled.

This has also been seen in London, where vehicles have been delivered well in advance of the charging facilities being available.

 

[Nammer]

I would say the argument for improving buses has generally been about reducing congestion, rather than purely environmental

Agreed.

 

[AM9]

Tyre 'dust' is potentially just as harmful as exhaust fumes.

I haven't seen any evidence to that effect, - have you?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It has been stated multiple times by multiple operators that two things are stopping more widespread electrification of bus services in the UK: the price premium on new vehicles, which essentially sees you getting one bus for the price of two, and the difficulties in arranging infrastructure with the power companies. This is often measured in months rather than weeks, and the electrical companies are unwilling to provide the necessary infrastructure upgrades to their grid until everything is set with the vehicles, which then have a smaller lead-time than the infrastructure, because they don't see it as useful to upgrade capacity that then might not get used if funding does not come through for vehicles and the project is cancelled.

This has also been seen in London, where vehicles have been delivered well in advance of the charging facilities being available.

Absolutely this!

In the provinces, operators are struggling to have effective fleet replacement without the fact that there is a significant cost premium. They are therefore reliant on external funding to bridge that gap from ZEBRA or Green Bus Funds.

Then you have the challenges on infrastructure as you have explained.

That said, who is making the decision to use public transport on environmental grounds. Few, I’d suggest… convenience (time) is a greater consideration, or cost, or Hobsons Choice

 

[Tetchytyke]

I haven't seen any evidence to that effect, - have you?

It's an area subject to new studies, but yes, there is increasing evidence that tyre dust produces both microplastic and particle pollution:

Car tyres produce vastly more particle pollution than exhausts, tests show

Toxic particles from tyre wear almost 2,000 times worse than from exhausts as weight of cars increases

www.google.com

Almost 2,000 times more particle pollution is produced by tyre wear than is pumped out of the exhausts of modern cars, tests have shown.
The tyre particles pollute air, water and soil and contain a wide range of toxic organic compounds, including known carcinogens, the analysts say, suggesting tyre pollution could rapidly become a major issue for regulators.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Oct 2022 ==

In the provinces, operators are struggling to have effective fleet replacement without the fact that there is a significant cost premium. They are therefore reliant on external funding to bridge that gap from ZEBRA or Green Bus Funds.

The big problem is the initial investment.

Electric cars are popular because they are cheaper to run and, with fewer moving parts, cheaper to maintain. But the set-up costs (home charger, etc) are high, and the purchase price is also higher.

You'd expect bus operators to see similar cost savings, but operators have neither the cash nor the inclination to make the initial investment.

 

[JD2168]

With regards to electric buses, the problem still seems to be the range of them. Can you get a full day out of one on a long route?

I also think some operators may be waiting to see how the Hydrogen buses run in Aberdeen and whether this is better particularly regarding range.

 

[edwin_m]

You wouldn’t need to take bus vehicles out of service if they could charge on the go. I’m thinking of a solution where buses can charge on trolley wires installed along the most intensively used roads, using the stored electricity to run on battery power for the parts of the journey away from wires.

Difficult to see how this would work in a deregulated environment. An operator won't stump up the capital unless they have some protection from competition for a significant period, and the public sector doesn't have any money.

 

[Dai Corner]

Difficult to see how this would work in a deregulated environment. An operator won't stump up the capital unless they have some protection from competition for a significant period, and the public sector doesn't have any money.

The public sector (UK Government) funded the rechargeable buses in Newport where I live. The Welsh Government has also funded some for the TrawsCymru services.